Comments for The Gauge Connectionhttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com
The curious ways to see the World of a theoretical physicistMon, 20 Jul 2015 06:22:35 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/Comment on Particle physics at a dead end by mfrascahttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/06/02/particle-physics-at-a-dead-end/#comment-13188
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 06:22:35 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4778#comment-13188Dear ohwilleke,

Thanks a lot for pointing this out. Yes, I was aware of this bad news as there has been a flooding in all the social networks about and an obituary by the New York Times. It is a severe loss for physics but his legacy will survive him forever.

Marco

]]>Comment on Particle physics at a dead end by ohwillekehttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/06/02/particle-physics-at-a-dead-end/#comment-13186
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 02:01:44 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4778#comment-13186Off topic: Nambu died. Though you should know.

]]>Comment on That Higgs is trivial! by mfrascahttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/04/05/that-higgs-is-trivial/#comment-12961
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 17:56:55 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4751#comment-12961Done. Please, feel free to read all the material here. If you will have difficulties to see where revolutions are, do not hesitate to get in touch with me for help.
]]>Comment on That Higgs is trivial! by phxmarkerhttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/04/05/that-higgs-is-trivial/#comment-12960
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 15:10:56 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4751#comment-12960it would help to resolve these problems by lifting up your heads from and looking to nature for solutions. The foundations of physics must be revisited to make any progress.
]]>Comment on NASA and warp drive: An update by phxmarkerhttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/nasa-and-warp-drive-an-update/#comment-12959
Fri, 12 Jun 2015 15:02:34 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4769#comment-12959The unified physics of Rauscher-Haramein is capable of explaining the theoretical principles behind this type of drive and others.

Thanks for your comment. I am somewhat a fan of QCD and I am working on it yet. What made me surprised is that, once researchers discovered it and saw that it was unsolvable, nobody cared too much. After 40 years we are here yet to cope with this matter. It is not a simple matter as people at CERN has to evaluate the background and a deep knowledge of QCD is essential. Looking in the literature you will realize that also at high energies, where perturbation theory applies, there are serious difficulties to treat this theory. So, QCD has all the chrisms of a problem promising a scientific revolution. Anyhow, it is a Cinderella with respect to other proposals that, without a single experimental evidence, seem to show greater appeal. This dyscrasia is at the basis of the difficulties we meet today in particle physics and is also the reason why a number of eminent physicists like Jona-Lasinio or Parisi preferred a different area for research. We are left with a kind of metaphysics and the discussions are similar to those of Scholasticism of the Middle Age where the number of angels on the head of a pin was a concern. It is difficult to reach an agreement here. Somebody has proposed to remove the strict constraints of the scientific method to accept the “fact” that multiverse is indeed a reality.

About the experiments the situation is somewhat different and my hope is to see at LHC some evidence that will permit us to left all the bad behind and starting again for the good. It is just a matter of days and we will see.

]]>Comment on Particle physics at a dead end by ohwillekehttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/06/02/particle-physics-at-a-dead-end/#comment-12928
Tue, 02 Jun 2015 23:34:46 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4778#comment-12928Particle physics may be mature, but it does seem that there is considerable legitimate basic science left to be done in QCD that is within the realm of possible experiments – for example – scalar and axial vector resonances that are not adequately explained, glueballs and other exotic hadrons to be identified or ruled out, parton distribution functions to be generalized from first principles, complex atomic nuclei to be explained from first principles, etc. And, of course, there is simply the issue of developing greater precision in QCD calculations and constants which lags horribly behind the precision found in electroweak phenomena. We may glimpse the end of the tunnel, but we are certainly not there yet.

Do you think that lepton universality will hold in the end? Or are the experimental hints of violations of it bona fide evidence of “new physics”?

]]>Comment on NASA and warp drive: An update by mfrascahttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/nasa-and-warp-drive-an-update/#comment-12830
Sat, 25 Apr 2015 22:24:27 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4769#comment-12830I cannot help here. You should publish it.

Good luck.

]]>Comment on NASA and warp drive: An update by Daniel de Françahttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/nasa-and-warp-drive-an-update/#comment-12829
Sat, 25 Apr 2015 22:07:39 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4769#comment-12829Yeah, but if not a experimental error, what else would be? I think this is the simplest explanation. If you wan to generate gravitational wave, you only have to make an object vibrate in with non null quadrupole momentum. This is what I think it is happening with these objects, which are mostly non uniform in their mass distributions.

This is not quantum gravity. It’s like saying a directional antenna needs quantume mechanics to describe its physics.

]]>Comment on NASA and warp drive: An update by mfrascahttps://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/nasa-and-warp-drive-an-update/#comment-12828
Sat, 25 Apr 2015 21:48:53 +0000http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/?p=4769#comment-12828Is it a theory of yours?
]]>